Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:50747-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 189 of 2025 Appellant :- Smt. Anchal Gupta and another Respondent :- State of U.P. and 6 others Counsel for Appellant :- Dan Bahadur Yadav, Umesh Chandra Vishwakarma Counsel for Respondent :- A.C.S.C., Ramanand Pandey Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J. 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 19.02.2025 passed in Writ C No. 4964 of 2025 whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioners has been dismissed with cost of Rs. 25,000/-. 2. The writ petition was filed by the petitioners seeking direction to the respondents not to interfere in their peaceful matrimonial life. Learned Single Judge after hearing the parties, came to the conclusion that the petitioners ordinarily reside in Pune, Maharashtra. The marriage was solemnized in Maharashtra and there was nothing on record to suggest that the respondents have ever extended any threat to the petitioners in Maharashtra. It was observed that no material has been produced on record to indicate that any threat having been extended in this regard and complaint has been made to the police at Pune, which could support the contentions of the petitioners and, consequently, the petition was found to be misconceived and was dismissed with cost of Rs. 25,000/-. 3. Counsel for the appellants made submissions that the allegations pertaining to harassment have been made in the petition, which were ignored by the learned Single Judge and, therefore, the order impugned deserves to be set aside. 4. Further submissions have been made that there was no occasion to impose the cost of Rs. 25,000/-, which is too much for the appellants to pay and, therefore, the order at least to that extent, be set aside. 5. Learned Standing Counsel supported the order impugned. 6. We have considered the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 7. A perusal of the writ petition would reveal that averments, totally general in nature without specification, have been made in the petition regarding the private respondents i.e. the parents of appellant no. 1 harassing the petitioners, based on which, the relief, as noticed herein above, was claimed. 8. Learned Single Judge was justified in coming to the conclusion that without there being any material on record to indicate any harassment having been caused by the private respondents, no relief could be granted and, therefore, dismissal of the writ petition cannot be faulted. 9. So far as the imposition of cost is concerned, filing of frivolous petitions, only with a view to create evidence qua the nature of marriage performed by the petitioners, cannot be encouraged and, therefore, imposition of cost by learned Single Judge also cannot be faulted. 10. There is no substance in the appeal, the same is, therefore, dismissed. Order Date :- 8.4.2025 Sandeep/Pkb (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad